6 ms·

If you serve something in another country, you abide by their rules. Be it a physical product or a virtual one, which includes a website or webservice.

nzmsv 5y ago
This is not, strictly speaking, an obvious forgone conclusion. Imagine that I call you over the phone, old school style, with voice. Would you or would you not want the governments on either end of the phone line to eavesdrop on our conversation so they can make sure it meets their local laws? What if we communicated by SMS? Email? Posting on a message board? Some people will have an "obviously yes, I want the government to be in charge, are you dumb?" reaction. Others will say "of course I want privacy, are you dumb?" Early Internet chose privacy. Modern internet is increasingly choosing regulation. But this is far from the obvious truth you are claiming it is, if only because the prevailing opinion changed in recent memory.
- Lio 5y ago
  Actually I'd quite like it if my government could block foreign phone calls that attempt to spoof local numbers. If only as a way of stopping foreign criminal gangs from scamming the vulnerable. The main reason this can't happen is because of international agreements that were made long before the internet age or this type of crime became a thing.
  - nzmsv 5y ago
    And there are others who, when faced with the trade-off, would choose differently. It's amusing how on another thread the general consensus may be a celebration of Let's Encrypt while over here I seem to come off as crazy (and thus deserving of downvotes simply for saying "not everyone agrees with you").
    - bruce343434 5y ago
      You are probably receiving downvotes because you're making a non sequitur. The web is, unlike phonelines, encrypted. At best it's a strawman or just a false equivalence.
      - nzmsv 5y ago
        Interesting! I see communication as communication, and the medium as completely separate. Does it really matter that much if I communicate an idea to another mind using squiggles on paper, dots on a screen, or recordings of sound waves?
- esrauch 5y ago
  I think I disagree with the premise of your argument that we're choosing between one of "pervasive wiretapping level invasiveness" or "internet companies cant be regulated" Do you want the government to bug you and watch every interaction you have in your local store to find out if the store is breaking the law? But then how does the government know if the store is just not paying their taxes, or selling drugs? Laws can be enforced without resorting to wiretapping everyone by just not accepting you can't catch every single violation; that true both online and offline.
- bruce343434 5y ago
  I agree, some laws are dumb and stupid, some inhumane, some simply impractical, and we should be above them. Sadly we aren't because we don't have an army and populace. If only I was in charge I would... But the sad reality is that I'm not.
wyager 5y ago
This concept is a recent legal development. It’s not obviously correct. Whether or not you think it’s correct, the obvious and inevitable conclusion is that the web will be siloed off and cease to be a global network.
- bruce343434 5y ago
  True, and we could already see this with the great firewall of China and the intranet of North Korea. And today, there's many American sites which serve me a 451 unavailable due to legal reasons, or just a permanent redirect to some "we care about our European visitors" weasel words.
  - sjtindell 5y ago
    Gambling sites and cryptocurrency exchanges come to mind as region locked services.
- scott_w 5y ago
  It’s really not. The concept of “your house, your rules” can be found in ancient Roman texts. Being a foreigner didn’t suddenly exempt you from the laws of the land.
  - wyager 5y ago
    The difference is that sending a packet to someone's house probably isn't the same as physically being inside their house.
    - scott_w 5y ago
      You think it’s unusual for a government to limit or put stipulations on what you can send into their country?
      - wyager 5y ago
        I don't care if it's "unusual" or not - I'm just pointing out that the legal model you're espousing will inevitably result in a siloed internet. Don't shoot the messenger.

nzmsv 5y ago

This is not, strictly speaking, an obvious forgone conclusion. Imagine that I call you over the phone, old school style, with voice. Would you or would you not want the governments on either end of the phone line to eavesdrop on our conversation so they can make sure it meets their local laws? What if we communicated by SMS? Email? Posting on a message board? Some people will have an "obviously yes, I want the government to be in charge, are you dumb?" reaction. Others will say "of course I want privacy, are you dumb?" Early Internet chose privacy. Modern internet is increasingly choosing regulation. But this is far from the obvious truth you are claiming it is, if only because the prevailing opinion changed in recent memory.

Lio 5y ago
Actually I'd quite like it if my government could block foreign phone calls that attempt to spoof local numbers. If only as a way of stopping foreign criminal gangs from scamming the vulnerable. The main reason this can't happen is because of international agreements that were made long before the internet age or this type of crime became a thing.
- nzmsv 5y ago
  And there are others who, when faced with the trade-off, would choose differently. It's amusing how on another thread the general consensus may be a celebration of Let's Encrypt while over here I seem to come off as crazy (and thus deserving of downvotes simply for saying "not everyone agrees with you").
  - bruce343434 5y ago
    You are probably receiving downvotes because you're making a non sequitur. The web is, unlike phonelines, encrypted. At best it's a strawman or just a false equivalence.
    - nzmsv 5y ago
      Interesting! I see communication as communication, and the medium as completely separate. Does it really matter that much if I communicate an idea to another mind using squiggles on paper, dots on a screen, or recordings of sound waves?
esrauch 5y ago
I think I disagree with the premise of your argument that we're choosing between one of "pervasive wiretapping level invasiveness" or "internet companies cant be regulated" Do you want the government to bug you and watch every interaction you have in your local store to find out if the store is breaking the law? But then how does the government know if the store is just not paying their taxes, or selling drugs? Laws can be enforced without resorting to wiretapping everyone by just not accepting you can't catch every single violation; that true both online and offline.
bruce343434 5y ago
I agree, some laws are dumb and stupid, some inhumane, some simply impractical, and we should be above them. Sadly we aren't because we don't have an army and populace. If only I was in charge I would... But the sad reality is that I'm not.

wyager 5y ago

This concept is a recent legal development. It’s not obviously correct. Whether or not you think it’s correct, the obvious and inevitable conclusion is that the web will be siloed off and cease to be a global network.

bruce343434 5y ago
True, and we could already see this with the great firewall of China and the intranet of North Korea. And today, there's many American sites which serve me a 451 unavailable due to legal reasons, or just a permanent redirect to some "we care about our European visitors" weasel words.
- sjtindell 5y ago
  Gambling sites and cryptocurrency exchanges come to mind as region locked services.
scott_w 5y ago
It’s really not. The concept of “your house, your rules” can be found in ancient Roman texts. Being a foreigner didn’t suddenly exempt you from the laws of the land.
- wyager 5y ago
  The difference is that sending a packet to someone's house probably isn't the same as physically being inside their house.
  - scott_w 5y ago
    You think it’s unusual for a government to limit or put stipulations on what you can send into their country?
    - wyager 5y ago
      I don't care if it's "unusual" or not - I'm just pointing out that the legal model you're espousing will inevitably result in a siloed internet. Don't shoot the messenger.